Much has been written about J. R. R. Tolkien, the esteemed author of the trilogy known as The Lord of the Rings. His trilogy pretty much defined what the fantasy genre was for a lot of people from the 1970s onward (despite the first editions being published in the 1950s) and many fantasy authors either try to imitate him or rebel against him.
However, an excellent blog known as the Scholar’s Stage (read the posts — they’re very high quality, not political guttersniping) pointed out another important legacy of Tolkien: he changed the way we view heroism in general.
Scholar’s Stage points out that the strongest feature of the “Tolkienic” hero is not only a refusal to abuse one’s power, but a view of that power as a dour duty, not an opportunity for glory (emphasis in original):
The first point: An aversion to glory is not just the defining character trait of the novel’s central hero. The distinction between greatness and power as goods to be strived for versus greatness and power as burdens to be carried is the distinction that sets apart almost of all of the novel’s protagonists from their foils.
[…]
The second point: Though this conception of power, corruption, and responsibility defines the mythic templates of our day, this is not the myth on which past ages were made.
We’ve heard this idea conveyed in various ways. “To whom much is given, much is expected.” “With great power comes great responsibility.” Indeed, Scholar makes the point that Tolkien did not invent these ideas, but rather, he codified them and made them a heroic ideal.
Nowadays, we think of the above just as What Heroes Are. It’s what makes the superhero genre work — you have these powerful beings who could conquer the world, but instead protect it and follow its laws and customs. The villain is defined by massive egomania and a desire to wield power for the sake of personal glory, no matter who has to be stepped on along the way. Some may be villains with a cause, but their desire to see absolute power as a positive good is what puts them at odds with heroes. We can scarcely conceive of heroes in any other way. The rejection of the above heroic norm leads to antiheroes at best and grimdark at worst.
But what does this have to do with me?
Easy: I wrote Shining Tomorrow with a Tolkienic protagonist despite never once reading Lord of the Rings OR watching the film adaptations.
Irma Kaneyasu doesn’t seek to be a world-famous figure praised by one and all; rather, she wants to be a good wife and wise mother when she grows into adulthood. She wants to measure up to the North American Federation’s ideals of gentle femininity in women, not cast them aside.
However, the abduction of her best friend Virginia Shirer has forced her to take on the role of a superhero, thus forcing her to use violence and aggression — qualities she doesn’t want to cultivate, as she deems them mannish. She sees her role not as an empowering strike against a rigid society, but as an unpleasant burden that she must carry to protect those she cares about. She will wield her gun and pilot her robot, but she would rather feed the homeless and care for young children.
The fact that I wrote a Tolkienic archetype without even reading the seminal work shows that Tolkien’s ideas have a range far beyond literature. They’ve come to symbolize heroism as a whole.
Rawle,
I disagree that heroism is dour. That’s more Conan and the pagan morality. Tolkien being Catholic regarded heroism as something to reluctantly accept like martyrdom for Aragon and something noble and uplifting for Sam, Pippen and Merry.
If you haven’t read Lord of the rings yet, give a shot when you can. You’ll see that Tolkein melds the pagan and Christian heroism. He’s also gently critiquing Conan which Tolkien enjoyed.
xavier
I have heard that Tolkien’s ideal of heroism is strongly rooted in Christianity, and I believe it, for where do the concepts of “what is good” come from?
Rawle,
Yup but he also integrated pagan heroism into Christanity much like the old chanson de gestes and sagas like Beowulf did.
Like I said he admired Conan but found the heroism wanting precisely for the paganism
xavier
Makes sense.
Rawle,
Yup. And here’s an idea for your upcoming series you might want to consider. Use the bushido heroism as a facet of the story. Then you can thrown in Christian heroism in the mix.
Your timeline where you mention that Christanity is prohibited in America
Got me thinking about how you can use the tension between the 2 understandings of heroism to develop a mythos from there.
I’m picking up a vibe that the kaizu will eventually represent an eternal evil that will compel the world to put aside their hostility to combat for a greater evil.
I’m most likely misreading your storyline but I’m so intrigued by the premise.
xavier
Use the bushido heroism as a facet of the story. Then you can thrown in Christian heroism in the mix.
An intriguing idea. I can’t make any promises, but it’s certainly a nice thing to consider.
Your timeline where you mention that Christanity is prohibited in America
Got me thinking about how you can use the tension between the 2 understandings of heroism to develop a mythos from there.
Not entirely correct regarding Christianity in the North American Federation. Religion of all kinds was banned in the NAF before World War III; even the fall of both the Norman Regime and the MacGruder Government didn’t change that. When the Japanese incorporated the NAF into their empire, they lifted the ban on religion. Two stipulations exist with regard to Christianity:
(1) Christianity was allowed, but all churches centered in Europe (Catholic Church, Church of England, Greek Orthodox, etc.) remain illegal. Episcopalians, Baptists, and Mormons are explicitly legal, while any other denominations are looked at on a case-by-case basis.
(2) No Japanese anywhere in the world may convert to Christianity, and that particular religion is banned completely in the Japanese home islands. Also, it is a crime to preach the Word to a Japanese.
I’m picking up a vibe that the kaizu will eventually represent an eternal evil that will compel the world to put aside their hostility to combat for a greater evil.
Only time will tell…
Rawle,
Thanks for the corrections and clarifications
These are helpful for understanding the timeline
xavier
You’re welcome.
Tolkien really brought us back to a Christian heroic ideal, and then superseded it. The West has gone through three basic archetypes – Achilles, Beowulf, and Arthur. Achilles was a boastful, selfish, and rather petulant hero. Arthur was the sacrificial King, the destined hero whose embrace of destiny leads ultimately to doom, and is marked by his humility. Beowulf is in-between, boastful and selfish yet cognizant of his responsibility to make the world better.
Aragorn was very Arthurian, but Frodo and Sam developed the Christian hero further – Frodo as reluctant hero who shoulders a terrible burden he has been destined to carry, despite the lack of reward in it, and then Sam as this astonishing new sort of hero who willingly embraces that burden out of genuine fraternal love. This further elucidation with Sam elevates the Western hero into something truly sublime – and Sam receives the ultimate yet homely reward of a good, quiet life filled with joy. What other hero has received such a delightful reward? And I think here we see the genuine Tolkien, a man marked forever by the terrible suffering of WWI who is yet able to return home and create for himself a wholesome and wonderful life.
We had an entire generation of Sams after WWII coming home to create the relatively nestlike personal environments of the 50s, who nevertheless nurtured the cuckoo’s egg of communism that so marred the 60s and later. It is, I believe, the responsibility of conservative writers to go back to the promise of the Sam and Frodo heroic archetypes and, ignoring the false start of the postmodern antiheroes and failed heroes also hatched from that egg, to revitalize Western literature along that road not quite taken.
It is a large, heavy ring we are proferred.
Very weighty; an excellent perspective. The 1950s was the way it was because they finally escaped the Great Depression and the Second World War.